Malthouse and the Buckley agreement

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

Let me start by saying that I haven't been Mick Malthouses biggest fan over the past ten years, as much as I recognize his brilliant tactical nous and ability to extract the most out of ordinary but honest players, I think at times he plays favorites (LEON) and has become a little too egocentric.

His explanation of our great season last year was the box, which he had worked out from some Roman/Greek/Spartan/WTF army, and to bring it up was baffling. He put all the boys on notice by saying that we can't drop for a moment (a good thing) and at the same time said that this game plan, which he took full credit for implementing would be bettered and we would have to evolve. It annoyed me more than a little that a coach who is so universally celebrated would need to inform people (if they didn't already know) that his game plan was a huge reason why COllingwood had been so successful in 2010. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that all Mick cares about is Mick. He defintiely gives out great plaudits to other people inside the club, and also to the players. But there is no doubting that he is an absolute control freak. Taking into consideration that he is a brilliant leader of men, there really isn't much reason why he shouldn't be a control freak either!!

But I have been reading some of the forums on the main page about this and I tend to agree with the posters who talk about the tension between Mick and Bucks. I can't believe that a man as wise as Mick Malthouse would go on TV (as he has done several times) and not talk up Nathan Buckleys development. Whenever questioned he always lumps his assistants together and never (or atleast I havent heard it) gives Buckley any sort of boost. Does Buckley need it? Probably not. Unless this is some sort of ploy that Mick is trying to rile Bucks to get the best out of him as a coach, then I think Mick is doing the wrong thing for the football club.

It's obvious that Mick is not happy about having to stand down. Some will say that he shouldn't be happy about it. But the way he baits the media, answers questions cryptically and constantly refuses to put out the fire enabling the media to continually talk it up reeks of a man satisfied that his great worth and stature is consistently the subject of conversation. It goes against everything 'team' that he preaches to the players (and yes, he does it brilliantly).

I obviously now love Mick as a coach, and I have always loved listening to him talk about football. But I will not mind if he leaves for Carlton, or Melbourne or whoever else wants him. Not because he wont be successful, he probably will, but it wasn't all Mick that won us a flag last year. He has had the reins at the club for over a decade and has only just now been ultimately successful. Why is that? Because now he finally has the players. Mick moving on and Bucks stepping in might be the ultimate test of how much influence a coach actually has on a premiership team, and though I know they have a huge say, I honestly think it's not as much as some would have you believe.

This will be the ultimate test for Mick. Will he stay at Collingwood and continue trying to build us into the Man U he hypothesized about when he first came over from the west? Does he have a genuine love for the black and white? Or is he just a coach doing his job? I already know for sure where Nathan Buckley's heart lies. If Mick leaves Collingwood then I will know that it's always been a bit more about Mick than Collingwood. If he stays then he will become a legend in my eyes, as much for his loyalty and love for our club as the premiership (premiershipS, hopefully!!). Funnily enough, the situation feels eerily similar to that of Dale Thomas.

In anticipation of the "well he is entitled to do the job he loves" comments, I would say that it should be being involved with the footy club and helping develop young people that he should love (including Nathan Buckley), not the "I am the boss" position he holds. I am certain if he is still at the club next year, he will be given roles to help develop the younger players and though Bucks will definitely want to be the top dog, I am certain he won't piss on a legend, especially one so respected by the guys he is coaching. It's certainly not about money and being "disrespected", if he leaves for Carlton or Melbourne it will all be about the ego. And even though it will disappoint me, I will still love Mick the coach and the success he has brought the club, but it will diminish the respect I have for his priorities.

I know that it is a long shot, but Bucks is a smart man, isn't there a chance, maybe just a minute chance but a chance nonetheless that Buckley might be as good a coach as Malthouse?? It's not like he wont have the resources or the cattle.

 

[Pera]

Re: Malthouse

I'm not quite sure what you're implying with this article. Mick has done a fantastic job with grooming out list and how can he not take the plaudits for the forward press? The coach is the one who tells the players how to play, it's not assistants telling Mick that his whole game plan should evolve around a press.

Midfield coaches often work on the clearance side of things, Forward coaches work on the 1 on 1's and goalkicking while backline coaches work on obviously the defensive side of the game. They have no dirent input into the game day tactics and positioning of players and to say the cattle is directly responsible for delivering us a flag is incorrect in my opinion. The coach plays a massive part in any premiership winning side.

Also, if Mick is so unhappy that he has to stand down, why would he have agreed to the conditions in the first place? He was never pushed out of the coaching role and genuinely thought if he couldn't deliver a flag in two years, then his time was up. As it stands, he is a very good chance to win two premiership in his last two years and i think that would be a job well done. Time to look to the future.

 

[jonbe54]

It's NOT a coincidence that the year Bucks took over as forward line coach that the press finally worked - true some players - Wellers/Beams/Sidebottom et al stepped up earlier than expected but nonetheless his influence can't be totally discounted.
Many people are going to have egg on their face when Bucks takes over - He's one smart cookie with a real footy brain and has calmed down from his "figjam" days significantly.
The boys will perform for him out of respect which is how it should be for a coach.

 

[jmac70]

That's two minutes I will never get back.

 

[Zahki]

Re: Malthouse

Also, if Mick is so unhappy that he has to stand down, why would he have agreed to the conditions in the first place?

Because the board was trying to move Mick on and get Buckley to replace him in 2009. It was Eddie who brokered the deal, Mick had to agree or he was going to lose his job there and then. It's no secret he's not happy with the current arrangement, Maxwell even said so in his book, a person with Micks pride would definitely feel a bit wronged by the club asking him to move aside when he build this extremely strong team from scratch, he has every right to wonder why he's not able to reap the full rewards.

That said I think at the time the agreement was the right thing to do. 10 years, no flag there was a case to be made for fresh blood to be brought in, the compromise was perfect, lets face it, we lose 2010 and people would be asking for Micks head on a platter the fact he got 2 extra years was very gracious from the club at the time.

I hope he stays, the thought of him moving to Carlton and helping them win a flag makes me retch, the club would be a laughing stock if that happens.

It's NOT a coincidence that the year Bucks took over as forward line coach that the press finally worked

Despite the fact Mick said Buckley criticised his gameplan and wasn't even there when it was conceived? Buckley wasn't the mastermind behind the press.

 

[Dr Pool]

all that matters is if we win the premiership this year.

 

[Pera]

Re: Malthouse

Despite the fact Mick said Buckley criticised his gameplan and wasn't even there when it was conceived? Buckley wasn't the mastermind behind the press.

Agreed, I think Bucks can be praised for the pressure we apply in the F50 but to say he was the chief mastermind behind the press as a whole is completely false.

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

Re: Malthouse

I'm not quite sure what you're implying with this article. Mick has done a fantastic job with grooming out list and how can he not take the plaudits for the forward press? The coach is the one who tells the players how to play, it's not assistants telling Mick that his whole game plan should evolve around a press.

Midfield coaches often work on the clearance side of things, Forward coaches work on the 1 on 1's and goalkicking while backline coaches work on obviously the defensive side of the game. They have no dirent input into the game day tactics and positioning of players and to say the cattle is directly responsible for delivering us a flag is incorrect in my opinion. The coach plays a massive part in any premiership winning side.

Also, if Mick is so unhappy that he has to stand down, why would he have agreed to the conditions in the first place? He was never pushed out of the coaching role and genuinely thought if he could deliver a flag in two years, then his time was up. As it stands, he is a very good chance to win two premiership in his last two years and i think that would be a job well done. Time to look to the future.

Not trying to imply a thing, just trying to explain how I feel about the whole situation. I am a little angry at the way he allows the talk to continue...."well that's the contract in place" instead of "Nathan is progressing beautifully and I think he will be a great senior coach for us."

Its amazing how now he is the reigning premiership coach he is immune to any criticism. Even brilliant minds can make mistakes and be swayed by their own ego. 95% of the things Mick says I love, but 5% I don't and it always seems to be about Bucks as coach.

 

[jonbe54]

Re: Malthouse

Because the board was trying to move Mick on and get Buckley to replace him in 2009. It was Eddie who brokered the deal, Mick had to agree or he was going to lose his job there and then. It's no secret he's not happy with the current arrangement, Maxwell even said so in his book, a person with Micks pride would definitely feel a bit wronged by the club asking him to move aside when he build this extremely strong team from scratch, he has every right to wonder why he's not able to reap the full rewards.

That said I think at the time the agreement was the right thing to do. 10 years, no flag there was a case to be made for fresh blood to be brought in, the compromise was perfect, lets face it, we lose 2010 and people would be asking for Micks head on a platter the fact he got 2 extra years was very gracious from the club at the time.

I hope he stays, the thought of him moving to Carlton and helping them win a flag makes me retch, the club would be a laughing stock if that happens.



Despite the fact Mick said Buckley criticised his gameplan and wasn't even there when it was conceived? Buckley wasn't the mastermind behind the press.

Zahki I didn't say he was all I said is that his influence couldn't be totally discounted. Leadership and respect are as important as tactics to a coach and its pleasing to see Bucks learning the lesson of walking the line between them.
It's not a Malty versus Bucks thread you know - we are bloody lucky to have them both. Chill man they will work it out between them.

 

[Swooop]

Re: Malthouse

I think it's not unreasonable to ask the question

For me, no person is all things to all people, and their are facets of MM that i wonder about.

Like, for example, I felt he was putting his 'statesmanship' side above the clubs interests with his Anzac day game comments, questioning why Collingwood had such an exclusive position to that game.

There is no question in my mind, he was under enormous pressure, from outside as well as self imposed, to deliver a flag to the Pies.

Having achieved that, the relief in him is palpable.

He is feeling very very relieved and as a result is feeling tremendously more expansive in his mood and thinking. He now wants to move to the next level of elder statesman of the game.

I think he deserves that, but hope that doesn't come at any cost for Collingwood.

Happily also as a result of this, I think his coaching will be better than ever this year, though he did say in one interview he dosen't actually do much coaching now, leaving most of it to the assistants now, iirc.

Like Tony Shaw, he presided over a flag, so he'll always hold a special place, even if he coaches Carlton to a flag over us next year.

Like the OP suggested, I think what MM does next year will be hugely telling.

I expect him to keep his word and stay at the Pies

 

[Optimax]

all that matters is if we win the premiership this year.

Yeah that's how I feel too